JA vs MD push out after the break match.

Are people seriously thinking millions of people that play pool in the bars occasionally, would want to see safety play on TV???

Safety play is something they cannot relate to and is what they consider "dirty pool" they would change the channel in no time.
 
Luxury said:
Are people seriously thinking millions of people that play pool in the bars occasionally, would want to see safety play on TV???

Safety play is something they cannot relate to and is what they consider "dirty pool" they would change the channel in no time.
Click to expand...

You may be right about the typical bar room guy but what about the APA & BCA leagues? How many people are playing in those leagues?

Maybe someone can help me out with that stat.
 
ENGLISH! said:
You may be right about the typical bar room guy but what about the APA & BCA leagues? How many people are playing in those leagues?

Maybe someone can help me out with that stat.
Click to expand...

According to this link

There's over 46 million people in the US that play pool. The APA says they have over 265,000 players.
 
BeiberLvr said:
According to this link

There's over 46 million people in the US that play pool. The APA says they have over 265,000 players.
Click to expand...

That's rather eye opening to me. I thought APA was more than that.

Maybe Pros should be playing 8 ball, cue ball fouls only & ball in the kitchen.

Thanks for the Stats.

Oh yeah & you have to be drinking alcohol or you can't play.
 
Pool is a great game, however, it will never "lead the way,

ENGLISH! said:
I just got into this reading this thread & I would agree with you CJ. The general public perceives making a ball on the break as luck & would perceive a break & run as... 'well he got lucky on the break, that's why he won.'

The push out battle would be a competition & the general public wants to see competition not luck, even though we know the break is more than just luck even though luck is still in there.

Best of 'Luck' in everything You do & Best Regards to You &
Click to expand...

The general public enjoy sports personalities more than the games, they always have and always will. Watching the sport or game will not be the priority. That's why players like Tiger and Michael effect ratings so drastically. Making the game of pool more strategic is only part of the equation, the much needed difference will be in the production, character development, and TV Presentation.

The question is how to develop these characters and personalities like they're developed in TV, Plays and in the movies. Pool's greatest "waves" were because of Paul Newman, Jackie Gleason, Tom Cruise, Steve Mizerak, Fats, and the one thing they had in common was a personality developed for TV/Movies, not for pool.

Pool is a great game, however, it will never "lead the way," it takes more than just a game to interest the TV Universe. Wrestling, MMA, and Poker figured this out many years ago.
 
CJ Wiley said:
The general public enjoy sports personalities more than the games, they always have and always will. Watching the sport or game will not be the priority. That's why players like Tiger and Michael effect ratings so drastically. Making the game of pool more strategic is only part of the equation, the much needed difference will be in the production, character development, and TV Presentation.

The question is how to develop these characters and personalities like they're developed in TV, Plays and in the movies. Pool's greatest "waves" were because of Paul Newman, Jackie Gleason, Tom Cruise, Steve Mizerak, Fats, and the one thing they had in common was a personality developed for TV/Movies, not for pool.

Pool is a great game, however, it will never "lead the way," it takes more than just a game to interest the TV Universe. Wrestling, MMA, and Poker figured this out many years ago.
Click to expand...

Hi CJ,

Tiger & Micheal are not that much of 'characters' IMHO. They were simply the best at what they did. The public was amazed by their abilities.

Then, keep in mind, except for The Miz, the other guys you mentioned are all actors playing characters.

A while back I was concerned that you might be heading toward something phony. I don't think you can develope 'characters' without it being phony like wrestling & roller ball. You may be able to find some, like Keith & Earl, but developing them will be contrived & phony. How many 'characters' does golf have. Is the public watching Golf for the 'characters' or for the great play of the game?

I hope that (contrived & phony) is not your intention. Finding the right format to show the true character of the players would certainly be beneficial.

AlL of the above are just my $0.02 humble opinions.

I certaily hope & wish whatever you are looking for or have up your sleeve is totally successful. The game certainly could use a shot of adrenaline in the arm.

Best Regards, Wishes & Thanks to You &
 
as long as they're entertaining, classy and influentially representing pool/billiards

ENGLISH! said:
Hi CJ,

Tiger & Micheal are not that much of 'characters' IMHO. They were simply the best at what they did. The public was amazed by their abilities.

Then, keep in mind, except for The Miz, the other guys you mentioned are all actors playing characters.

A while back I was concerned that you might be heading toward something phony. I don't think you can develope 'characters' without it being phony like wrestling & roller ball. You may be able to find some, like Keith & Earl, but developing them will be contrived & phony. How many 'characters' does golf have. Is the public watching Golf for the 'characters' or for the great play of the game?

I hope that (contrived & phony) is not your intention. Finding the right format to show the true character of the players would certainly be beneficial.

AlL of the above are just my $0.02 humble opinions.

I certaily hope & wish whatever you are looking for or have up your sleeve is totally successful. The game certainly could use a shot of adrenaline in the arm.

Best Regards, Wishes & Thanks to You &
Click to expand...

Yes, Tiger and Michael were the best at what they did, but you may "humbly agree" that golf and basketball used them to promote those two games.....that's the point of the "characters before games" philosophy.

I am always suggesting to use "World Champion" caliber players, although the jury may still be out on "Fats", Paul Newman and Tom Cruise. ;)

I guess you could call all characters "phony and contrived" if you insist on being negative.....as long as they're entertaining, classy and influentially representing pocket billiards you can call them anything you choose. :thumbup:
 
CJ Wiley said:
Yes, Tiger and Michael were the best at what they did, but you may "humbly agree" that golf and basketball used them to promote those two games.....that's the point of the "characters before games" philosophy.

I am always suggesting to use "World Champion" caliber players, although the jury may still be out on "Fats", Paul Newman and Tom Cruise. ;)

I guess you could call all characters "phony and contrived" if you insist on being negative.....as long as they're entertaining, classy and influentially representing pocket billiards you can call them anything you choose. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

CJ,

I apologize. I was not trying to be negative. Texting is difficult with no tone or inflection transmitted. I'm sure you can relate to that.

After reading your last post, I remembered about the private persona vs. the public persona thing. Yeah, I agree, a few good real public persona characters would certainly be good for the game as long as they are not great actors getting 'totally' in character like wrestling & roller blade.

I know you will do what's best. Maybe it's my perception of your use of the words 'develpoing characters' that is off base. My Bad. Public persona 'characters' seems to sit better with me.

Sorry for the aggravation from my 'anal' self.

On a better note, I beat the last session Champ of my individual money league even up Thursday night. It's my 1st. league type action in nearly 20 years. I used TOI to nail several difficult shots while coming from behind & then going ahead & then closing it out with a full table 9' bank on the 8 with the bridge. I can't wait til the league is over so I can really devote 3 to 4 weeks of uninterupted time with it to nail down the position aspect. Plus my table is coming home soon as well.

Also do you have a recommeded manner of driving the lighter red circle ball past the tangent line on centenial object balls? Fran suggested a longer smooth stroke. Tying to hit it with 'ovverspin' has only worked a couple of times. Usually the cue ball jumps up off the centenials.

All the Best to You &
 
Last edited:
MahnaMahna said:
Quote:

Originally Posted by BeiberLvr

The APA says they have over 265,000 players.

And about 1% (or less) would have any interest in watching any form of pay per view pool.
Click to expand...

One percent would top the current ppv record by a good chunk, that'd be great.


Posted from Azbilliards.com App for Android
 
Whenever I see safety play on television I imagine all the viewers that are thinking or saying, "Hell I would have fired the bank in! This guy is playing like a little beeyotch. This is pussy pool. Next."

It would be a complete bust if every game started like that.
 
Viewers

Hmmm been thinking a bit.
I don´t know how many viewers snooker has but from what I understand it´s "loads" of people and from looking at the public, crowd when looking at Eurosport etc I also see many folks that most likely isn´t players themselves. They "endure" to look at matches that are very long, days but still they are "nailed". They also seem very knowledgeable about the game and really enjoys the battle, both the snookering and the potting.
Snooker starts every frame with a "snooker" and still they are watching.

I´m no snooker player myself, like to look at it from time to time, not as much as pool though.
But what if we could get some of the same crowd be interested in looking at pool, theese people obviously doesn´t think snookering is boring and what if the knowledge about pool will increase and the new or us "old-timers" really started to like a new format as suggested?

I for sure would really like to see some good players play with this and I strongly suggest that CJ and a good opponent, JA would be great to do a exhibition streamed so we all could evaluate it and maybe come up with some new thoughts etc. No danger in trying.

Maybe we are wrong and the snooker crowd is right, food for thoughts I hope.

Regards


Chrippa
 
pool always averaged a million viewers or more because this audience was built in

CreeDo said:
One percent would top the current ppv record by a good chunk, that'd be great.


Posted from Azbilliards.com App for Android
Click to expand...

You're right and this is why PPV doesn't draw people into playing pool from the "general public," it doesn't even have the power to draw from league players.

The nice thing about doing pool shows with ESPN is they have a "TV Universe" of over 60 Million, and pool always averaged a million viewers or more because this audience was built in, and always will be on ESPN.
 
Chrippa said:
Hmmm been thinking a bit.
I don´t know how many viewers snooker has but from what I understand it´s "loads" of people and from looking at the public, crowd when looking at Eurosport etc I also see many folks that most likely isn´t players themselves. They "endure" to look at matches that are very long, days but still they are "nailed". They also seem very knowledgeable about the game and really enjoys the battle, both the snookering and the potting.
Snooker starts every frame with a "snooker" and still they are watching.

I´m no snooker player myself, like to look at it from time to time, not as much as pool though.
But what if we could get some of the same crowd be interested in looking at pool, theese people obviously doesn´t think snookering is boring and what if the knowledge about pool will increase and the new or us "old-timers" really started to like a new format as suggested?

I for sure would really like to see some good players play with this and I strongly suggest that CJ and a good opponent, JA would be great to do a exhibition streamed so we all could evaluate it and maybe come up with some new thoughts etc. No danger in trying.

Maybe we are wrong and the snooker crowd is right, food for thoughts I hope.

Regards


Chrippa
Click to expand...

It may be cultural too. The way pool evolved here from 1700-1900's was different than over the pond. Our society chose to view pool rooms as dens of inequity....and they strongly spread that message. But to start off a rotation pool game with board play is not much different than beginning a game of straight pool or one hole. Incredible cue ball control for a good saftey is easily appreciated by the audience.
 
MahnaMahna said:
And about 1% (or less) would have any interest in watching any form of pay per view pool.
Click to expand...

But put it on cable tv and you could get an audience, if it were on a regular schedule and put together reasonably well.

I think more league players would watch matches with safeties in them than you think, so long as its an occasional part of the game. Again, on tv, not PPV.
 
CJ Wiley said:
You're right and this is why PPV doesn't draw people into playing pool from the "general public," it doesn't even have the power to draw from league players.

The nice thing about doing pool shows with ESPN is they have a "TV Universe" of over 60 Million, and pool always averaged a million viewers or more because this audience was built in, and always will be on ESPN.
Click to expand...

Go get it done. You don't need to sell it to anyone here. An opinion is worth what you are willing to bet on it. I am pulling for you.
 
Last edited:
This Game produces more OFFENSE, not more defense.

justadub said:
But put it on cable tv and you could get an audience, if it were on a regular schedule and put together reasonably well.

I think more league players would watch matches with safeties in them than you think, so long as its an occasional part of the game. Again, on tv, not PPV.
Click to expand...

The talk about "Push Out" being full of safeties is from those that haven't played the game. You have to play more aggressively to win playing "Two Shot Push Out". IT MAKES PLAYERS PLAY MORE AGGRESSIVELY. This isn't about safeties. Think, for a moment, if you play me safe and I can simply roll out, then what good did it do to play me safe? That's right, a safety doesn't help you win the game AT ALL!

In One Foul if you play safe you can get ball in hand and win the game effortlessly. In Roll Out (Push Out) you will NEVER get ball in hand after a safety, so why would you do it, you'd be better off taking MORE chances to run out every time.

Can you see the difference? Safeties in Push Out are useless, so they are LESS, not MORE. This Game produces more OFFENSE, not more defense. 'The Game is the Teacher'
 
roll out

CJ, in addition to the fact that there is no reward for playing a safe in roll out so it encourages offence, there is another factor. In texas express if you miss a shot the penalty is much greater. Even if you are fortunate enough not to leave a good shot, if your opponent can see any piece of the ball they are the favorite to lock you up. So in TX express you lose by letting them see the ball. In roll out you have to leave a pocketable shot for it to cost you the game. So again, more incentive to be aggressive.
 
I'm saying they're right

Tin Man said:
CJ, in addition to the fact that there is no reward for playing a safe in roll out so it encourages offence, there is another factor. In texas express if you miss a shot the penalty is much greater. Even if you are fortunate enough not to leave a good shot, if your opponent can see any piece of the ball they are the favorite to lock you up. So in TX express you lose by letting them see the ball. In roll out you have to leave a pocketable shot for it to cost you the game. So again, more incentive to be aggressive.
Click to expand...

Yes, One Foul allows you to run a few balls, then lock your opponent up where he has to "kick" at the ball. This means you to take no chances and don't even try to break balls out to run the table. :shrug: borrrriiiiinnngggg

The "old school" players looked at this as a cowardly way of playing. I'm not saying I agree.....I'm saying they're right. hmmm, what's the difference? On my answer I played a "safety".

can-stock-photo_csp2175946.jpg
New Proposed Ad For One Foul Rules.
 
I just want to make sure I understand. In the era where everyone's attention span is getting shorter and shorter, you think it might make better TELEVISION if there is a mandatory push out after each break?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top